Themed Paper

Measurement and Control

2020, Vol. 53(9-10) 1561–1570
A review of different designs and Ó The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
control models of remotely operated sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0020294020952483

underwater vehicle journals.sagepub.com/home/mac

Ying He1 , Dao Bo Wang2 and Zain Anwar Ali3

Abstract
This article reviews remotely operated underwater vehicle (ROUV) and its different types focusing on the control sys-
tems. This study offers a brief introduction of unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) together with ROUV. Underwater
robots are designed to work as an alternative to humans because of a difficult and hazardous underwater environment.
The applications and demand of marine robots are increasing with the passage of time. There are several research arti-
cles and publications available on these topics but, a complete review of old and recent research about this technology is
still hard to find. This article also assesses some recently published research papers on underwater systems. It presents
the comparison of different control systems and designs of underwater vehicles. There have been major developments
in marine technology depending on the needs, applications and cost of different missions. Scientists design many remo-
tely operated vehicles based on the educational or industrial purposes. This article is presented in order to help and
assist the future researchers as a massive review of the field of remotely operated underwater vehicles and their possible
future developments are presented.

Keywords
Unmanned underwater vehicle, remotely operated underwater vehicle, observation class, working class

Date received: 21 June 2020; accepted: 31 July 2020

Introduction increases with the depth of the water which negatively

affects the stability of the underwater vehicle. The con-
In the last few years, many researchers have shown their trol system of the vehicle avoids the disturbances (drag
interest in studying and exploring the underwater envi- effects, ocean currents) and obstacles.9 The position
ronment. As the interest increased, the demand of an and orientation of actuators on vehicle, control sur-
unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) also increased.1 faces, and shape of vehicle are some constraints that
These vehicles operate underwater without humans limits the control independence.10
onboard and are also known as underwater drones.2 Due to aforementioned factors, it is difficult to keep
Based on the shapes and operation, UUVs are divided the vehicle on the required path and complete the
into two kinds; autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) underwater mission. Optimizing the control system of
and remotely operated underwater vehicle (ROUV).3 the vehicle is crucial because it reduces the time and the
The main difference between these two types are that cost of the mission.11 Similarly, the allocation of the
an operator controls the ROUV while AUV operates actuators on the vehicle must be in accurate position
independently.4 that leads to the precise movement and efficient usage
ROUVs have become substantial for the applica- of the energy resources.12 The control systems with
tions like surveillance, patrolling, and for industrial
applications, for example offshore exploration of oil
and gas.5 Station keeping and position stalking are the
two main features of these vehicles. It means that vehi- 1
Xi’an Aeronautical Polytechnic Institute, Xi’an, Shaanxi, China
cle maintains the same position with respect to its 2
Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, Jiangsu,
structure all the time.6 It also has applications in the China
3
exploration of deep waters which is out of reach for School of Systems Science, Beijing Normal University, China.
humans.7 Corresponding author:
It is very important to construct and configure the Ying He, Xi’an Aeronautical Polytechnic Institute, Xi’an, Shaanxi, China.
robot or vessel in a cost-effective manner.8 The pressure Email: xapiheying@126.com

Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without
further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/
open-access-at-sage).
1562 Measurement and Control 53(9-10)

good performance under these constraints attain a high the torpedoes and mines.22 The sequential development
degree of autonomy.13 in ROUV technology and the overall the progress of
Previously, many researchers contributed in model- ROUV technology from simulation level to the proto-
ing, designing, and construction of ROUV with a grip- type and to the commercialization from modelling of
per. These types of vehicles have a capability to grasp single robot to multiple ROUVs are briefly discussed
the target object underwater.14 The mechanical struc- here.
ture of ROUV consist of actuators, camera, gripper, The development of underwater robots started in
and sensors. The additional equipment are electronic 1950s. Dimitri Rebikoffin created the first fully devel-
modules and suction arm.15 In these types of systems, a oped underwater robot called POODLE in 1953. The
cable connects the operator and vehicle. The under- expansion of these vehicles began in 1970s, until then,
water vehicle is powered from the control surface plat- these robots were only used for transferring, gathering
form.16 The under-actuated system cannot achieve of data. From 1970 to 1980, research on potential
complete control over its dynamics because of deep ROUVs expanded. The first actual machine designed
underwater restraints. Therefore, ROUV with perfect in USA called Torpedoes was developed but it was only
design and controller is required for the completion of used for experimental purposes.23 In this era, many test
underwater scenario.17 benches were constructed and considered for the explo-
Moreover, equipment and sensors used in ROUV ration and research on this technology. The experimen-
impact the dynamic behavior of the system.18 Some tal and theoretical growth on ROUV took place in this
applications of ROUV requires precise position and era. From 1980 to 1990, many failures and successful
navigation capabilities. These types of vehicles achieve tryouts were carried out with prototypes.24
these capabilities by fiber optic gyro based on inertial In this era, the aforementioned experimental and
navigation system (INS).19 There are many controllers theoretical procedures were executed in real time in
that have been designed previously for underwater fields. Darpar lab in USA constructed almost all these
vehicles including sliding mode control, proportional prototypes. This era is also known as the era of design-
integral derivative and adaptive robust control.20 ing and development of ROUV.25 1990 to 2000: this
Nowadays, the community of underwater robotic tech- period was called as first generation ROUVs because
nology is actively trying to model, design, and con- of goal fulfilling technology development. The designed
struct the smart ROUV.4 and developed ROUVs in this era were able to com-
The major contributions of this research are: (a) plete tasks on time and achieved all its goals.26 Many
comprehensive review of different designs of ROUVs institutions and organizations were able to construct
and their applications; (b) detailed discussion of the these robots. This progress opened the doors for com-
various classic and novel control models for ROUVs; mercialization of these underwater vehicles. 2000 to
(c) evaluation and assessment of the state of the art 2010: in this era, the true commercialization of ROUV
research on ROUV; (d) analysis of the under-actuated took place.27,28
and actuated designs of the ROUV and their merits Many different companies failed to design and con-
and demerits. struct this technology according to market demand. In
The rest of the article is organized as follows: section this decade, a drive from theoretical to manufacturing
‘‘Literature review’’ reviews the present literature on of ROUV took place. The main issue hindering the
the underwater vehicles. Section ‘‘State of the art’’ total commercialization was the unaffordability.
offers the state of the art research on ROUV. Section Another direction of this technology was cooperative
‘‘Review of recent research on ROUV’’ compares and control of ROUVs which also gained steam in this
discusses some of the recent research on underwater era.23 From 2010-forwards: in the previous decade, a
vehicles. Section ‘‘Review of control systems and opera- few theoretic characteristics on co-operative control of
ROUVs developed. During this era, the scientists
tion modes’’ introduces different control systems and
implemented the cooperative methods practically.
discusses operation modes of ROUV. Section ‘‘Review
Likewise, these robots are constructed on a commercial
of different models and designs’’ mainly focuses on the
basis.
development and design requirements of ROUV.
Figure 1 explains the different categories of under-
Section ‘‘Conclusion’’ concludes the whole research.
water vehicles. First, they classify either as manned or
unmanned. Then, for unmanned underwater vehicles,
Literature review we could have AUVs (non-tethered) or ROUVs (teth-
ered). Again, there are mainly two types of ROUVs:
Underwater vehicles are pilotless and non-maintained observation class and working class.29
robots that are able to perform underwater operations Table 1 discusses the different types of observation
either by wired communication or via on-board com- and working class ROUVs. Working class is bigger in
puters. Moreover, the concept of underwater vehicle is size with more power and payload capabilities but also
not a new one.21 The thought initially started in the late has a high cost. Working class is mainly used for under-
90s when the Royal Navy used the word ‘‘Cutlet’’ for a water repairing.30 It can carry loads of around 300 kg
remotely operated underwater robot which recovered and can execute a number of sophisticated underwater
He et al. 1563

Table 1. Different types of ROUV with their abilities and working depth.

Class Type Shallowest Deepest Average Ability

depth depth depth
reached (m) reached (m) reached (m)

Observation Mini31 20 313 104 Alternative of

diver and easy
to carry
Regular32 1 408 159 Can conduct sonar, gripper mounted, and used in
application of light
Working Light33 712 1097 860 Able to run one manipulator
Heavy34 100 4689 1959 Able to run at least two manipulators and do heavy
repairing underwater

Figure 3. An example of an observation class ROUV.

tasks. Working class machines can reach the depth of

more than 4500 m and can deliver around 220 hp.
Working class underwater vehicles come with an assort-
Figure 1. Underwater vehicles categories. ment of sensors and cameras for data capture and navi-
gation in addition to two manipulators for intervention
tasks. Figure 2 shows an example of a working class
ROUV.
On the other hand, observation class is more widely
used because of its low cost and extensive applications
like inspection and survey.35 It is considerably smaller
than a working class vehicle. It can carry loads of over
35 kg. A range of cameras and sensors can be used with
the ROUV as required, which is ideal for regular
inspections of underwater structures. It can also act as
a supplementary visual support to working class vehi-
cles. Figure 3 shows an example of an observation class
ROUV.

State of the art

This section presents some of the cutting-edge research
into underwater vehicles and their control design. Yan
et al.36 introduces a groundbreaking new system called
Human-in-the-loop which is an innovative new tech-
nique to help us further explore the untapped resources
in the depth of the sea. The paper designs a robust pro-
Figure 2. An example of a working class ROUV.
portional derivative (PD) controller to track the
1564 Measurement and Control 53(9-10)

position of the ROUV. This research constructs offers a new robust controller for ROUV that can track
Lyapunov-Krasovskii functions to study the ROUV depth of the ocean. To reduce the communication delay
stability. Then under specific constraints, the paper between the ROUV and the controller, the paper
demonstrates that the controller is able to stabilize the designs a groundbreaking nonlinear controller. The
underwater vehicle. Lastly, the results prove the effec- results show that the error between the depth of the
tiveness of the proposed algorithm. In another recent ROUV and the chosen route reaches zero using the
research on underwater vehicles, Batmani and Najafi37 designed controller.

Review of recent research on ROUV

Author Title Research work Results

Ali et al.38 Stabilizing the dynamic The author designs twin controller approach Experimental results and
behavior and position to regulate the complete behavior of simulations proved the
control of an ROUV underwater robot. The controller design effectiveness of the proposed
April 2020 comprises of proportional-integral-derivative control method by
(PID) along with model reference adaptive successfully tracking the
control (MRAC). The MRAC controller ROUV. The proposed
minimizes the dynamic noise and control strategy converged
disturbances of the system. While PID helps quickly, reduced the error,
tune the adaptive gains of the underwater and decreased the dynamic
system. noise and disturbances.
Dong et al.39 Depth control of ROUV in In this article depth control strategy is Experiments proved that the
nuclear power plant based proposed, which combines fuzzy PID and hybrid control technique of
on fuzzy PID and dynamics dynamic compensation on the fact that the PID and dynamic
compensation reactor water is very calm. By using ANSYS compensation can meet the
September 2019 FLUENT software the hydrodynamics analysis mission requirements. The
of ROUV is conducted in order to find out depth control can vary
the relationship between resistance of water within 3 cm which is practical
and moving velocity in heave direction. for the reactor pool.
Bykanova et al.40 The compact ROUV with The author developed a small sized highly The results showed that the
variable restoring moment. maneuverable ROUV used for shipwrecks ROUV speeds along the
2019 survey with several features, that is, variable normal and longitudinal
storing moment by rotated wing in the plane motion are within the
of vehicle. It is an over actuated system with acceptable range of 20.75 to
four horizontal thrusters which increases the 0.75 m/s and 21 to 1 m/s.
high range of maneuverability. Furthermore,
underwater vehicle carries the lithium
battery which causes weight reduction of
tether and add unique features, that is, return
to coast in case of emergency or damage in
cable.
Ali et al.3 Controlling and stabilizing The position of fully-actuated ROUV with a The proposed control
the position of ROUV manipulator is stabilized by the author in this technique can control the
equipped with manipulator article. The proposed control algorithm erratic deviations and reduce
2019 applied on 8-DOF underwater vehicle the errors. The simulations
system. proved that the designed
ROUV can effectively
reached the chosen position.
Omerdic et al.41 Precision control and In this paper, the author proposed a The study successfully
dynamic positioning of prototype platform which is used to test and designed a model platform to
ROUV in intervention validate new technologies for marine prove the effectiveness of
operations operations. The designed ROUV is equipped the proposed technology.
April 2017 with unique features, advanced 3D visual Experimental results show
displays, modern and easy pilot interface, and that the designed model can
multiple modes for operations, voice control achieve the mission
navigation, and low-level controllers with requirements.
auto tuning system.
Hieu et al.42 Numerical analysis of The author worked on the simulation The results proved the
LBV150 ROUV thruster techniques to improve the thruster precision of the algorithm
performance under open performance of ROUV during forward and proposed in this study. This
water test condition reverse mode under water test conditions. technique can be used to
November 2017 The thrust coefficient of the thrusters examine the dynamic
confirmed from simulations by testing in responses of comparable
open waters. thrusters in other ROUVs.
(continued)
He et al. 1565

Continued

Author Title Research work Results

Santiago and Development of a low-level In this article, the author simulates a Visor3 This research successfully
Vásquez43 control system for Visor3 system for underwater vehicles. The implemented the proposed
ROUV mathematical model based on 6-DOF system. Simulation results
2016 explained by using two coordinate systems, show that it is able to
that is, body frame and earth frame. The control the motion of the
(NGC) navigation guidance and control vehicle. It is more effective
structure divided into three layers. Firstly, the and stable than classic
mission planner known as high level secondly, algorithms.
the path planner or mid-level and the last one
is the low-level formed by control and
navigation system.

Review of control systems and operation unsatisfactory performance. In the recent years, the six
modes commonly used control methods for the underwater
vehicles are as follows:
Control systems
A control system comprises of an array of processes (a) Proportional integral derivative (PID): One of the
that stabilizes the underwater vehicle, so that it obeys most commonly used control strategy is PID. It is
the instructions programmed by the operator. Due to a linear control method that can improve the effi-
the non-linearity, environment disturbances, and plant ciency of ROUV by using a closed loop control
equations, it is not easy to design the control system of system.56 One widespread practice is to use a dif-
underwater vehicles.44 Cohan45 asserts that the control ferent PID controller for every degree of freedom
system designing for ROUVs is a contemporary (DOF) of ROUV to enable autopilot.
research topic and also has potential for future studies. (b) Linear quadratic Gaussian (LQG): Linear quad-
It is evident from the number of papers being published ratic Gaussian technique is a linear control strat-
for the design and development of control systems for egy which is best suited for undefined systems
ROUVs. with additive white Gaussian and the systems
One study46 applied and verified a control and navi- with incomplete state information. Field et al.57
gation system for ROUVs using pre-programmed con- applied this method to the underwater vehicle
trollers to adjust speed. Another research47 designed an control problem.
effective adaptive control mechanism to make sure that (c) Sliding mode controller (SMC): When dealing
a 6-DOF underwater system follows a given route. In with parameter constraints, sliding mode control
one article,48 researchers offered an assessment of dif- (SMC) is the best nonlinear control method. The
ferent control methods using neural networks, demon- primary disadvantage of the SMC is the chattering
strating their benefits, shortcomings, and their effect, which can lead to high frequency modes.
applications. One researcher49 proposed a hybrid PD They can affect the functioning of the system
controller for dynamic orientation of ROUVs when the negatively, and can cause the system to destabilize.
task is performed near underwater infrastructures and One research58 proposes an SMC without any
needs precise implementation. chatter for controlling the trajectory of ROUVs.
Bessa et al.50 controlled depths in underwater vehi- (d) Higher order sliding mode (HOSM): In order to
cles using a combination of sliding mode controllers get rid of the chattering effect and enhance the
and fuzzy adaptive algorithms. One study51 designed an performance, we use HOSM. It is a nonlinear con-
efficient PID controller to control underwater systems trol strategy used for the motion control of the
used in oceanic surveys. To track routes vertically, one underwater vehicles.59
research52 developed a robust feedback controller. (e) Neural network (NN): Neural networks are pow-
Another study53 simplified the traditional fuzzy control erful tools that are capable of approximating
method for an underwater system. In one research,54 numerous linear and nonlinear functions. In many
scholars offered a decoupled PD set point controller cases, these networks can adjust to varying input-
using quasi-velocities for underwater systems. One output relations. These NN can also correctly
study55 offered a vigorous control method for an under- map multivariable functions. They are simple to
water system that subdues pitch and yaw coupling. implement in hardware as well.48
The automatic control of these types of vehicles (f) Fuzzy logic controller (FLC): Fuzzy logic control-
yields a difficult design due to the dynamics of nature. lers are effective robust controllers with numerous
Controllers based on the simple models have very applications. The successful application of FLC to
1566 Measurement and Control 53(9-10)

Figure 4. Four operation modes of ROUV. (a) Surface in tow mode. (b) Actuated mode on surface. (c) Actuated ROUV
submerged. (d) Submerged ROUV in tow.

nonlinear, complex, and poorly defined systems While, Figure 4(c) shows ROUV fully submerged in
makes FLC ideal for use in underwater vehicle water operating using its thrusters. In this mode, we
control systems.60 can control it in 6 degrees of freedom (DOF). Lastly,
Figure 4(d) shows the ROUV partially submerged
Controlling ROUV is tough because of hydrodynamic while in tow. During strong currents, underwater vehi-
effects and parameter uncertainties. The overall control cles cannot maneuver accurately using its thrusters,
system design problem for underwater vehicles com- therefore, we operate it while being towed by the
prise of modeling uncertainties and non-linearities, that boat.41
is, hydrodynamic non-linearities, inertial non-linear-
ities.61 Since PID is a simple control technique, it is
more commonly used and has implemented successfully
Review of different models and designs
on different ROUVs. For underwater applications, commonly the size of
ROUV is small. The main task of the vehicle is to grasp
the object underwater and to give a basic visual inspec-
Operation modes tion of the platforms. These types of vehicles are
Operations modes of an underwater vehicle depend on equipped with the actuators for controlling the direc-
the mission requirement. Whether we need the ROUV tion, a sensor to collect the underwater data, a manipu-
to survey or inspect the oceanic atmosphere or whether lator to grasp the object underwater and camera for the
we need it to for underwater repairing, there are differ- real time monitoring. Joystick is used to control the
ent operation modes for each. During these several movements of the vehicle. An underwater cable con-
operation modes, ROUV uses a fiber cable and a nects both the vehicle and joystick. These types of vehi-
pulley. It uses a fiber cable to connect the underwater cles may be wired or wireless. Wired systems have
vehicle with the operator. The operator also controls greater efficiency and control mainly due to no lag in
the vehicle through the cable and sends and receives the communication system.
the data from the instruments and sensors.
The underwater vehicles have multiple modes of
operation. It can operate on the surface of water as a
Underactuated models
survey platform towed by the boat as shown in Figure First model. This model consists of the main controller,
4(a) or actuated on the surface by the thrusters to per- that is, Arduino Mega through which drivers of the
form roll, pitch and yaw as shown in Figure 4(b). motors/pumps are connected and controlling of
He et al. 1567

Figure 5. First under-actuated model.

Figure 6. Second under-actuated model.

Figure 7. Control diagram of the actuated model.

motors/pumps takes place. Sensors such as barometer,

ultrasonic sensors are also connected to the controller.
Manipulator used for grasping object underwater, is
also connected to the controller. Remote control (RC)
is used for the input signal. Lastly, the controlling of
manipulator takes place through the MATLAB where
image processing takes place and the signal is trans-
mitted and received from ground to water through the
RF module. The Figure 5 shows the prototype used in
this under actuated system.

Second model. This system contains the main controller,

that is, Arduino UNO which controls the actuators on
the basis of data it gathers from sonar, pressure, and
electric current sensors. The gripper mounted on vehicle Figure 8. Actuated model.3
used for grasping object underwater take input signal
from the joystick based on image processing thorough
MATLAB, which receives visual data from IP camera. waterproofing, and controlling issues. Moreover, the
The joystick is used for the input signal to control the IP-camera do not work properly in the depth of water.
movements. Figure 6 presents the prototype used for They classify as under-actuated systems because of hav-
the second under-actuated model. ing fewer actuators than the degree-of-freedom. Due to
The main defects of the aforementioned two totally wireless system, they faced lag in communica-
under-actuated models are communication issues, tion as well.
1568 Measurement and Control 53(9-10)

Table 2. Comparison of different ROUV designs.

Parameter Design 1 Design 2 Design 3 Design 4 Design 5 Design 6 Design 7

(Visor3 ROV)62 (KaxanROV)63 (Baby ROV)64 (KCROV)65 (Ariana ROV)65 (DENA ROV)66 (Li ROUV)3

Controller Joystick – GUI Joystick – GUI Joystick Joystick GUI Two joystick Joystick
– GUI
Light 3 U U U 3 U 3
Camera U U U U U U U
Sensor Depth, Depth, gyro, Pressure, Depth, Pressure, Arm sensor Gyro,
temperature, compass temperature GPS, IMU accelerometer, barometer
flooding inclinometer

Actuated model  It should be able to deploy and control from

Above Figure 7 presents the control diagram of the actu- small vessels on surface, trawlers.
 The input signal should be given to the vehicle
ated model. The joystick sends the signal to controller
connected via connector. As the controller receives the through a cable from a joystick at the surface.
 The robot should be able to provide a clear
signal, the stored program reads the command and per-
vision of the depth via live streaming system
form the task according to the pre-programmed instruc-
tions. Microcontroller controls the actuators for the with hi-tech lights.
 It must be able to hold the given position and
precise movement of the ROUV. IP camera is connected
through the MATLAB GUI to an Arduino UNO and orientation through a precise controller.
the data from the sensor is prepared. The controller also
controls the manipulator to grasp the object. The Figure If it is equipped with a gripper, then it should be able to
8 shows the model used for this actuated system. grasp an object from the depth with utmost accuracy.
The actuated system is much more efficient than
under-actuated systems in terms of stability and con-
trolling. The system consists of six bilge pumps work-
Conclusion
ing as thrusters, four of them with thrust power of This paper presented a complete overview of recent
1100 GPH are for roll and yaw movements, and research and trends in ROUV technology. Supporting
remaining two 1500 GPH are for pitch movements. The structures of the robots to perform different tasks were
body is equipped with waterproof circuitry, live stream- described with their applications. This study also pro-
ing camera and an electronic gripper. This system per- vided a brief overview of different the control methods
formed well due to wired connection, which minimizes for ROUV including proportional integral derivative
data loss and increases efficiency. Joystick controls the (PID), linear quadratic Gaussian (LQG), sliding mode
gripper with the help of visuals it receives from camera, controller (SMC), and higher order sliding mode
rather than the image processing mechanism. (HOSM). Moreover, this study compared and analyzed
some recent research experiments on these vehicles.
Comparison of different designs of ROUV Future prospects include novel intelligent control tech-
In the last few decades, many ROUVs have been niques where new control schemes will be introduced
designed and constructed for observation, monitoring for better stability and controlling. Each scheme has
and for working purposes as well.42 This section com- advantages and disadvantages based on the mission
pares different designs of ROUV with regards to differ- requirements. This paper also presented the detailed
ent controllers and sensors. Each design has its own comparison of different designs of ROUVs and also
control system depending upon their purpose. The discussed their development. The review provided the
main difference between two classes of ROUV is weight idea to design the system in terms of controller, sensor,
and control system. Table 2 provides the comparison and communication system.
between different ROUV designs.
Declaration of conflicting interests
Design requirements The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
After considerable research and experiments, following article.
are the requirements which the scientists have identified
and kept in mind before starting the design phase of the Funding
underwater vehicle.
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup-
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
 The body structure should be strong enough to article: Key research project of Xi’an AERONAUTICAL
bear all the hydrodynamic forces, pressures, and POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE (No.: 19xhsk-002) and
temperature and it should accommodate all in- Scientific research project of Education Department of
depth and surface activities. Shaanxi Provincial Government(No.: 15jk1381).
He et al. 1569

ORCID iDs portable ROVs. In: OCEANS 2019-Marseille, Marseille,

Ying He https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1537-6812 France, 17–20 June 2019, pp. 1–6. New York: IEEE.
Zain Anwar Ali https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2143-2879 15. Shen Z, Zhong H, Xu E, et al. An underwater robotic
manipulator with soft bladders and compact depth-
independent actuation. Soft Robot. Epub ahead of print
References 28 February 2020. DOI: 10.1089/soro.2019.0087.
16. Raugel E, Opderbecke J, Fabri MC, et al. Operational
1. Nicholson JW and Healey AJ. The present state of and scientific capabilities of Ariane, Ifremer’s hybrid
autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) applications and ROV. In: OCEANS 2019-Marseille, Marseille, France,
technologies. Mar Technol Soc J 2008; 42(1): 44–51. 17–20 June 2019, pp. 1–7. New York: IEEE.
2. Gould RA. Archaeology and the social history of ships. 17. Elmokadem T, Zribi M and Youcef-Toumi K. Control
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. for dynamic positioning and way-point tracking of under-
3. Ali ZA, Li X and Tanveer MA. Controlling and stabiliz- actuated autonomous underwater vehicles using sliding
ing the position of remotely operated underwater vehicle mode control. J Intell Robot Syst 2019; 95(3–4): 1113–1132.
equipped with a gripper. Wirel Pers Commun. Epub 18. Lack S, Rentzow E and Jeinsch T. Experimental para-
ahead of print 22 November 2019. DOI: 10.1007/s11277- meter identification for an open-frame ROV: comparison
019-06938-2. of towing tank tests and open water self-propelled tests.
4. Armstrong RA, Pizarro O and Roman C. Underwater IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019; 52(21): 271–276.
robotic technology for imaging mesophotic coral ecosys- 19. Matsuda T, Maki T and Sakamaki T. Accurate and effi-
tems. In: Loya Y, Puglise KA and Bridge TCL (eds) Meso- cient seafloor observations with multiple autonomous
photic coral ecosystems. Cham: Springer, 2019, pp. 973–988. underwater vehicles: theory and experiments in a hydro-
5. Stratigea A and Argyropoulos V. Linking land and thermal vent field. IEEE Robot Autom Lett 2019; 4(3):
underwater cultural heritage management to technology 2333–2339.
in smart cities and communities. Management 2019. 20. Zendehdel N, Sadati SJ and Ranjbar Noei A. Adaptive
6. Yang C, Wang Y and Yao F. Driving performance of robust control for trajectory tracking of autonomous
underwater long-arm hydraulic manipulator system for underwater vehicles on horizontal plane. J AI Data Min
small autonomous underwater vehicle and its positioning 2019; 7(3): 475–486.
accuracy. Int J Adv Robot Syst 2017; 14(6): 1729881417 21. Bhopale P, Kazi F and Singh N. Reinforcement learning
747104. based obstacle avoidance for autonomous underwater
7. Momber G, Sakellariou D, Rousakis G, et al. The multi- vehicle. J Mar Sci Appl 2019; 18(2): 228–238.
disciplinary search for underwater archaeology in the 22. Petillot YR, Antonelli G, Casalino G, et al. Underwater
Southern Red Sea. In: Rasul NMA and Stewart ICF robots: from remotely operated vehicles to intervention-
(eds) Geological setting, palaeoenvironment and archaeol- autonomous underwater vehicles. IEEE Robot Autom
ogy of the Red Sea. Cham: Springer, 2019, pp. 605–628. Lett 2019; 26(2): 94–101.
8. Bonnin-Pascual F, Ortiz A, Garcia-Fidalgo E, et al. A 23. Radivojević T, Costello Z and Martin HG. ART: a
reconfigurable framework to turn a MAV into an effec- machine learning automated recommendation tool for
tive tool for vessel inspection. Robot Comput Integr synthetic biology. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.11091 2019.
Manuf 2019; 56: 191–211. 24. Jiang Z, Sun T, Luo G, et al. A preliminary study on the
9. Heshmati-Alamdari S, Karras GC, Marantos P, et al. A development of a novel marine growth cleaning robot for
robust predictive control approach for underwater jacket platforms. In: International conference on offshore
robotic vehicles. IEEE T Contr Syst T. Epub ahead of mechanics and arctic engineering, Glasgow, Scotland, 9–
print 3 October 2019. DOI: 10.1109/TCST.2019.2939248. 14 June 2019, vol. 58851, p. V07BT06A048. New York:
10. Yu C, Xiang X, Wilson PA, et al. Guidance-error-based American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
robust fuzzy adaptive control for bottom following of a 25. Ackerman E. The underwater transformer: ex-NASA
flight-style AUV with saturated actuator dynamics. IEEE engineers built a robot sub that transforms into a skilled
T Cybernetics 2020; 50(5): 1887–1899. humanoid. IEEE Spectrum 2019; 56(8): 22–29.
11. MahmoudZadeh S, Powers DMW and Zadeh RB. State- 26. Utne IB, Schjølberg I and Roe E. High reliability manage-
of-the-art in UVs’ autonomous mission planning and task ment and control operator risks in autonomous marine
managing approach. In: Autonomy and unmanned vehi- systems and operations. Ocean Eng 2019; 171: 399–416.
cles. Singapore: Springer, 2019, pp. 17–30. 27. Yamamoto I, Morinaga A and Ura K. Development of
12. Bhardwaj KK, Khanna A, Sharma DK, et al. Designing remotely operated underwater vehicle and applications to
energy-efficient IoT-based intelligent transport system: the sea. In: The 29th international ocean and polar engi-
need, architecture, characteristics, challenges, and appli- neering conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, 16–21 June 2019.
cations. In: Mittal M, Tanwar S, Agarwal B, et al. (eds) Mountain View, CA: International Society of Offshore
Energy conservation for IoT devices. Singapore: Springer, and Polar Engineers.
2019, pp. 209–233. 28. Di Lillo PA, Simetti E, De Palma D, et al. Advanced
13. Lee J, Dallali H, Jin M, et al. Robust and adaptive ROV autonomy for efficient remote control in the Dex-
dynamic controller for fully-actuated robots in opera- ROV project. Mar Technol Soc J 2016; 50(4): 67–80.
tional space under uncertainties. Auton Robot 2019; 29. Christ RD and Wernli RL Sr. The ROV manual: a user
43(4): 1023–1040. guide for observation class remotely operated vehicles.
14. Li MS, van der Zande R, Hernández-Agreda A, et al. Oxford: Elsevier, 2011.
Gripper design with rotation-constrained teeth for mobile 30. Schjølberg I, Gjersvik TB, Transeth AA, et al. Next gen-
manipulation of hard, plating corals with human- eration subsea inspection, maintenance and repair opera-
tions. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2016; 49(23): 434–439.
1570 Measurement and Control 53(9-10)

31. Rachmansyah Y, Rahmat M, Ahmad R, et al. Rancang 50. Bessa WM, Dutra MS and Kreuzer E. Depth control of
Bangun 4 DOF (degree of freedom) underwater remotely remotely operated underwater vehicles using an adaptive
operated vehicle (ROV). Almikanika 2019; 1(1). fuzzy sliding mode controller. Robot Auton Syst 2008;
32. Sward D, Monk J and Barrett N. A systematic review of 56(8): 670–677.
remotely operated vehicle surveys for visually assessing 51. Alvarez A, Caffaz A, Caiti A, et al. Folaga: a low-cost
fish assemblages. Front Mar Sci 2019; 6: 1–19. autonomous underwater vehicle combining glider and
33. Zhang X, Zhang F, Qi Y, et al. New research methods for AUV capabilities. Ocean Eng 2009; 36(1): 24–38.
vegetation information extraction based on visible light 52. Subudhi B, Mukherjee K and Ghosh S. A static output
remote sensing images from an unmanned aerial vehicle feedback control design for path following of autono-
(UAV). Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 2019; 78: 215–226. mous underwater vehicle in vertical plane. Ocean Eng
34. Zhao M, Yuan Q, Wang T, et al. Multidisciplinary design 2013; 63: 72–76.
optimization of a heavier-than-water underwater vehicle 53. Ishaque K, Abdullah SS, Ayob SM, et al. A simplified
using a semi-empirical model. Int J Offshore Polar Eng approach to design fuzzy logic controller for an under-
2019; 29(4): 474–484. water vehicle. Ocean Eng 2011; 38(1): 271–284.
35. Capocci R, Dooly G, Omerdić E, et al. Inspection-class 54. Herman P. Decoupled PD set-point controller for under-
remotely operated vehicles – a review. J Mar Sci Eng water vehicles. Ocean Eng 2009; 36(6–7): 529–534.
2017; 5(1): 13. 55. Petrich J and Stilwell DJ. Robust control for an autono-
36. Yan J, Gao J, Yang X, et al. Tracking control of a remo- mous underwater vehicle that suppresses pitch and yaw
tely operated underwater vehicle with time delay and coupling. Ocean Eng 2011; 38(1): 197–204.
actuator saturation. Ocean Eng 2019; 184: 299–310. 56. YildizÖ, Gökalp RB and Yilmaz AE. A review on
37. Batmani Y and Najafi S. Event-triggered HN depth con- motion control of the underwater vehicles. In: Interna-
trol of remotely operated underwater vehicles. IEEE T tional conference on electrical and electronics engineering
Syst Man Cyb. Epub ahead of print 20 February 2019. 2009: ELECO 2009, Bursa, Turkey, 5–8 November 2009,
DOI: 10.1109/TSMC.2019.2896382. pp. II–337. New York: IEEE.
38. Ali ZA, Li X and Noman M. Stabilizing the dynamic 57. Field AI, Cherchas D and Calisal S. Optimal control of
behavior and position control of a remotely operated an autonomous underwater vehicle. In: World Automatic
underwater vehicle. Wireless Pers Commun. Epub ahead Congress, Hawaii, 2000.
of print 19 April 2020. DOI: 10.1007/s11277-020-07378-z. 58. Soylu S, Buckham BJ and Podhorodeski RP. A
39. Dong M, Li J and Chou W. Depth control of ROV in chattering-free sliding-mode controller for underwater
nuclear power plant based on fuzzy PID and dynamics vehicles with fault-tolerant infinity-norm thrust alloca-
compensation. Microsyst Technol 2020; 26(3): 811–821. tion. Ocean Eng 2008; 35(16): 1647–1659.
40. Bykanova AY, Storozhenko VA and Tolstonogov AY. 59. Salgado-Jimenez T, Spiewak J-M, Fraisse P, et al. A
The compact remotely operated underwater vehicle with robust control algorithm for AUV: based on a high order
the variable restoring moment. IOP Conf Ser Earth sliding mode. In: Oceans’ 04 MTS/IEEE Techno-Ocean’04
Environ Sci 2019; 272(2): 022199. (IEEE Cat. No. 04CH37600), Kobe, Japan, 9–12 Novem-
41. Omerdic E, Toal D and Dooly G. Precision control and ber 2004, vol. 1, pp. 276–281. New York: IEEE.
dynamic positioning of ROVS in intervention operations. 60. Smith SM, Rae GJS, Anderson DT, et al. Fuzzy logic
J Robot Autom 2017; 1(1): 24–41. control of an autonomous underwater vehicle. Control
42. Hieu NK, Thien PQ and Nghia NH. Numerical analysis Eng Pract 1994; 2(2): 321–331.
of LBV150 ROV thruster performance under open water 61. Valentinis F and Woolsey C. Nonlinear control of a sub-
test condition. In: Duy V, Dao T, Zelinka I, et al. (eds) scale submarine in emergency ascent. Ocean Eng 2019;
International conference on advanced engineering theory 171: 646–662.
and applications. Cham: Springer, 2017, pp. 1037–1046. 62. Khalid MU, Ahsan M, Kamal O, et al. Modeling and
43. Rúa S and Vásquez RE. Development of a low-level con- trajectory tracking of remotely operated underwater vehi-
trol system for the ROV Visor3. Int J Navigation Obs cle using higher order sliding mode control. In: 2019 16th
2016; 2016: 8029124. international Bhurban conference on applied sciences and
44. Azis FA, Aras MSM, Rashid MZA, et al. Problem identi- technology (IBCAST), Islamabad, Pakistan, 8–12 Janu-
fication for underwater remotely operated vehicle (ROV): ary 2019, pp. 855–860. New York: IEEE.
a case study. Procedia Eng 2012; 41: 554–560. 63. Lund-Hansen LC, Juul T, Eskildsen TD, et al. A low-cost
45. Cohan S. Trends in ROV development. Mar Technol Soc remotely operated vehicle (ROV) with an optical posi-
J 2008; 42(1): 38–43. tioning system for under-ice measurements and sampling.
46. Caccia M and Veruggio G. Guidance and control of a Cold Reg Sci Technol 2018; 151: 148–155.
reconfigurable unmanned underwater vehicle. Control 64. Abdullah AM, Zakaria NI, Jalil KAA, et al. Review of
Eng Pract 2000; 8(1): 21–37. the control system for an unmanned underwater remotely
47. Do KD, Pan J and Jiang Z-P. Robust and adaptive path operated vehicle. In: Öchsner (ed.) Engineering applica-
following for underactuated autonomous underwater tions for new materials and technologies. Cham: Springer,
vehicles. Ocean Eng 2004; 31(16): 1967–1997. 2018, pp. 609–631.
48. van de Ven PWJ, Flanagan C and Toal D. Neural net- 65. Kungwani B and Misal N. Design and fabrication of a
work control of underwater vehicles. Eng Appl Artif Intell low cost submersible ROV for survey of lakes. Int Res J
2005; 18(5): 533–547. Eng Technol 2017; 4(9): 718–724.
49. Hoang NQ and Kreuzer E. Adaptive PD-controller for 66. Azmi MWN, Aras MSM, Zambri MKM, et al. Compari-
positioning of a remotely operated vehicle close to an son of controllers design performance for underwater
underwater structure: theory and experiments. Control remotely operated vehicle (ROV) depth control. Int J
Eng Pract 2007; 15(4): 411–419. Eng Technol 2018; 7(3.14): 419–423.